ML16193A357: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
=Text= | =Text= | ||
{{#Wiki_filter:United States Court of AppealsFOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT____________No. 16-1189September Term, 2015NRC-50-247-LRNRC-50-286-LRFiled On: June 23, 2016In re: Friends of the Earth, et al.,Petitioners------------------------------Entergy Nuclear Indian Point 2, LLC andEntergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.,IntervenorsBEFORE:Griffith, Srinivasan, and Millett, Circuit JudgesO R D E RUpon consideration of the emergency petition for writ of mandamus and thesupplement thereto, the responses, and the reply, it isORDERED that the emergency petition for writ of mandamus be denied. Petitioners have failed to demonstrate a clear and indisputable right to the extraordinaryrelief requested. See Gulfstream Aerospace Corp. v. Mayacamas Corp., 485 U.S. 271,289 (1988).Per CuriamFOR THE COURT:Mark J. Langer, Clerk BY:/s/Robert J. Cavello Deputy ClerkUSCA Case #16-1189 Document #1621433 Filed: 06/23/2016 Page 1 of 1 | {{#Wiki_filter:United States Court of AppealsFOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT____________No. 16-1189September Term, 2015NRC-50-247-LRNRC-50-286-LRFiled On: June 23, 2016In re: Friends of the Earth, et al.,Petitioners------------------------------Entergy Nuclear Indian Point 2, LLC andEntergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.,IntervenorsBEFORE:Griffith, Srinivasan, and Millett, Circuit JudgesO R D E RUpon consideration of the emergency petition for writ of mandamus and thesupplement thereto, the responses, and the reply, it isORDERED that the emergency petition for writ of mandamus be denied. Petitioners have failed to demonstrate a clear and indisputable right to the extraordinaryrelief requested. See Gulfstream Aerospace Corp. v. Mayacamas Corp., 485 U.S. 271,289 (1988).Per CuriamFOR THE COURT:Mark J. Langer, Clerk BY:/s/Robert J. Cavello Deputy ClerkUSCA Case #16-1189 Document #1621433 Filed: 06/23/2016 Page 1 of 1}} | ||
}} | |||
Revision as of 07:00, 19 May 2018
| ML16193A357 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Indian Point  |
| Issue date: | 06/23/2016 |
| From: | Langer M J US Federal Judiciary, US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit |
| To: | Mullins C E NRC/OGC |
| References | |
| 16-1189, 1621433, 50-247-LAR, 50-286-LAR | |
| Download: ML16193A357 (1) | |
Text
United States Court of AppealsFOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT____________No. 16-1189September Term, 2015NRC-50-247-LRNRC-50-286-LRFiled On: June 23, 2016In re: Friends of the Earth, et al.,Petitioners------------------------------Entergy Nuclear Indian Point 2, LLC andEntergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.,IntervenorsBEFORE:Griffith, Srinivasan, and Millett, Circuit JudgesO R D E RUpon consideration of the emergency petition for writ of mandamus and thesupplement thereto, the responses, and the reply, it isORDERED that the emergency petition for writ of mandamus be denied. Petitioners have failed to demonstrate a clear and indisputable right to the extraordinaryrelief requested. See Gulfstream Aerospace Corp. v. Mayacamas Corp., 485 U.S. 271,289 (1988).Per CuriamFOR THE COURT:Mark J. Langer, Clerk BY:/s/Robert J. Cavello Deputy ClerkUSCA Case #16-1189 Document #1621433 Filed: 06/23/2016 Page 1 of 1